Need to respect decision to live together: SC
Court acknowledges farm unions’ right to protest, but says stir shouldn’t disturb movement of people
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday said it will always respect the decision of an adult couple to live together and not investigate a marriage just because the man and the woman belong to different religions.
“As a system and as an institution, we must respect the decision of a couple,” observed a bench of justices UU Lalit and Ajay Rastogi while refusing to entertain a petition by a woman’s parents, who claimed that their daughter, a Hindu, was forcibly converted to Islam and married to a Muslim man against her will.
“As a system, we should not be prying into the privacy of a couple if a man and woman want to live together. We have to respect their decision as adults,” the court remarked.
The bench relied on a state ment given by the woman to the police officers in Chandigarh where the couple lived together.
NEW DELHI: You have to find a solution... They (farmers) have a right to protest but inflow and outflow can’t be interrupted, the Supreme Court said on Monday as it pulled up the Centre and two state governments over continued blocking of roads in the national capital region due to the protests against the three farm laws. “You have to find a solution... They (farmers) have a right to protest but inflow and outflow can’t be interrupted. (This) causes great inconvenience to other people. If protests are on the traffic should not be stopped... movement of people should not be disturbed,” a bench headed by Justice SK Kaul said. “The solution lies in hands of the Centre and state governments,” the court added.
The matter has been listed for hearing next month.
The court was responding to an affidavit filed by the Uttar Pradesh government that said efforts to “make farmers understand (the) grossly illegal act of blocking roads” were underway.
The affidavit said removing the agitators was difficult because most of them are “aged and old farmers”. The affidavit was in response to a writ petition filed by Monica Agarwaal, a resident of Noida, who had alleged that travelling to Delhi from Noida for her marketing job has become a “nightmare” as the journey has increased from 20 minutes to two hours due to the road blockade.
The court on March 26 issued notices to the Centre and Delhi Police “to ensure that the road area is kept clear so that the passage from one place to the other is not affected”.
“(Road) diversions have been created to allow for smooth movement of traffic between Ghaziabad (and other places in the state) and Delhi via Maharajpur and Hindon roads, as NH 24 is still blocked,” the UP government said in its affidavit, complaining that the highway had been “repeatedly blocked by farmers protests in January, March and again in April”.
Thousands of farmers, mainly from the states of Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh, have been camping at Delhi’s borders since November last year, seeking a repeal of the new farm laws -- the Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act passed by Parliament last year -- which they say will erode their bargaining power, weaken a system of assured prices, and leave them vulnerable to exploitation by agri businesses. The central government claims that the laws are part of the long-pending reforms in the agriculture sector. The farmers’ groups led by BKU, however, complain that it will put them at the mercy of corporates, resulting into an impasse over the two sides since November last.
Several rounds of talks between have failed to break the deadlock between the two sides.
Earlier, on April 20, the SC called upon the farm leaders to reflect on whether their protests over three contentious agricultural laws should continue to obstruct others’ right to commute freely on public roads.